Rollcast: Proper-Score Gated Rolling Anchors for Adaptive Probabilistic Time-Series Forecasting

Probabilistic forecasters are increasingly learned, yet the baselines they are compared against are often weak or omitted. We show that the simplest possible conformal interval - a last-value point forecast wrapped in a finite-sample split-conformal residual quantile, with no parameters and no training - is a far stronger baseline than its near-total absence from recent learned-forecasting and conformal-time-series comparisons would suggest. In one-step-ahead online forecasting across 2,217 real series from nine public sources (Monash, LOTSA, the LTSF traffic/electricity/weather suites, METR-LA, BOOM, nips/probts), this ConformalNaive interval decisively beats the naive value-quantile baselines, the entire NPTS family (NPTS 73%, SeasonalNPTS 64% of series), and the published Conformal Seasonal Pools (CSP) method (71% of series, bootstrap 95% CI [69,73], paired Wilcoxon p approx 7.6e-135); it is on par with the simpler learned conformal predictors (RCI, quantile regression; median relative Winkler within 2%) and is beaten only by the adaptive-online and ensemble methods (SPCI, ACI, AgACI), which track distribution shift and lead by 9-33% relative Winkler. It is also better calibrated than a trained neural forecaster: on the six datasets that introduced DeepNPTS, the trivial floors cover the truth 84-85% of the time at a nominal 95%, versus DeepNPTS's 66%. At multi-step seasonal horizons the picture inverts: the random-walk floor is the weakest method and the seasonal pool (CSP) wins - a boundary we map. Finally we give ConformalNaive+, a one-line, training-free, horizon-adaptive selector that attains the better of two complementary floors at every horizon with restored coverage. We argue the matching conformal naive floor must be a mandatory baseline whenever a learned probabilistic forecaster claims gains.

Probabilistic time series forecasting has attracted increasing attention in financial applications due to the need to quantify risk and uncertainty in future observations. We propose ProbRes, a post-hoc probabilistic calibration method that explicitly learns and incorporates volatility dynamics into probabilistic forecasting, enabling effective handling of heteroskedastic data. During training, ProbRes employs two architecture-agnostic modules to separately model the conditional mean and conditional volatility. At the inference stage, it generates predictive distributions by resampling normalized residuals. ProbRes is applicable to both univariate and multivariate time series and remains robust under a wide range of error distributions, including non-Gaussian innovations with conditional heteroskedasticity. Theoretical results demonstrate ProbRes's validity and experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets show that ProbRes accurately captures predictive distributions and produces well-calibrated prediction intervals.

We propose Conformal Seasonal Pools (CSP), a training-free probabilistic time-series forecaster that mixes same-season empirical draws with signed residual draws around a seasonal naive forecast. In an audited rolling-origin benchmark on the six time-series datasets where DeepNPTS was originally evaluated (electricity, exchange_rate, solar_energy, taxi, traffic, wikipedia), CSP-Adaptive significantly outperforms DeepNPTS on every metric we report -- CRPS (per-window paired Wilcoxon $p \approx 4 \times 10^{-10}$), normalized mean quantile loss ($p \approx 7 \times 10^{-10}$), and empirical 95% coverage ($p \approx 8 \times 10^{-45}$, mean 0.89 vs 0.66) -- while running over 500x faster on CPU. Coverage is the most decision-critical of these: a 0.95 nominal interval that contains the truth in only ~66% of cases fails the basic calibration desideratum and would not survive deployment in safety- or decision-critical settings. The failure mode is also more severe than aggregate coverage suggests: in the worst 10% of windows, DeepNPTS's prediction interval covers none of the H forecast horizons -- the entire multi-step trajectory misses the truth at every step simultaneously. This poses serious risk in safety- and decision-critical applications such as healthcare, finance, energy operations, and autonomous systems, where prediction intervals that systematically miss the truth across the entire planning horizon translate directly into misclassified patients, regulatory capital failures, grid imbalances, and safety-case violations. CSP achieves all of this with no learned parameters and no training. We argue training-free conformal samplers should be mandatory baselines when evaluating learned non-parametric forecasters.